【鑑定目的禁止】検出可否報告スレ7 at SEC

---

[2ch|▼Menu]

■コピペモード
□スレを通常表示
□オプションモード
□このｽﾚｯﾄﾞのURL
■項目テキスト
612:名無しさん＠お腹いっぱい。 08/10/21 00:27:49 Second: Lately there has been a large proliferation of tests based on VirusTotal. I won't comment on those automatic tests but instead I would focus on a question: where is written how tested samples are really choosed? How samples are really tested if they are really malware and if they are really dangerous and not in any way corrupted files? On that webpage there's only written "on the limited corpus of malware binaries captures by our honeynet" . It's not really the best way, for a lot of reasons. Just an example: some antiviruses detect corrupted files as corrupted, some other detect corrupted files as malware (presence of the signature) even if they are clearly corrupted and they can't be executed at all, some other don't detect corrupted files. So do antiviruses that don't detect corrupted files score worse than other antiviruses? Why?

---

次ページ

最新レス表示

スレッドの検索

類似スレ一覧

話題のニュース

おまかせリスト

▼オプションを表示

レスジャンプ

mixiチェック！

Twitterに投稿

オプション

しおりを挟む

スレッドに書込

スレッドの一覧

暇つぶし2ch

---

4992日前に更新/202 KB
担当:undef